%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : E---3.5.1
% Problem : NUM648^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.7.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8046.5625MB
% OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Wed Sep 30 08:16:41 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Theorem 0.26s 0.37s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 11 ( 4 unt; 0 typ; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 21 ( 20 equ; 0 cnn)
% Maximal formula atoms : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 46 ( 6 ~; 3 |; 2 &; 30 @)
% ( 0 <=>; 5 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 6 ( 4 avg)
% Number of types : 1 ( 1 usr)
% Number of type conns : 0 ( 0 >; 0 *; 0 +; 0 <<)
% Number of symbols : 7 ( 5 usr; 5 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 14 ( 0 ^; 14 !; 0 ?; 14 :)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
nat: $tType ).
thf(decl_23,type,
x: nat ).
thf(decl_24,type,
y: nat ).
thf(decl_25,type,
pl: nat > nat > nat ).
thf(decl_26,type,
esk1_0: nat ).
thf(decl_27,type,
esk2_0: nat ).
thf(satz8b,conjecture,
! [X4: nat,X5: nat] :
( ( x
= ( pl @ y @ X4 ) )
=> ( ( x
= ( pl @ y @ X5 ) )
=> ( X4 = X5 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.3JjEuzDZoI/E---3.1_3924841.p',satz8b) ).
thf(satz8a,axiom,
! [X1: nat,X2: nat,X3: nat] :
( ( ( pl @ X1 @ X2 )
= ( pl @ X1 @ X3 ) )
=> ( X2 = X3 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.3JjEuzDZoI/E---3.1_3924841.p',satz8a) ).
thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X4: nat,X5: nat] :
( ( x
= ( pl @ y @ X4 ) )
=> ( ( x
= ( pl @ y @ X5 ) )
=> ( X4 = X5 ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[satz8b]) ).
thf(c_0_3,plain,
! [X11: nat,X12: nat,X13: nat] :
( ( ( pl @ X11 @ X12 )
!= ( pl @ X11 @ X13 ) )
| ( X12 = X13 ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[satz8a])])]) ).
thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( ( x
= ( pl @ y @ esk1_0 ) )
& ( x
= ( pl @ y @ esk2_0 ) )
& ( esk1_0 != esk2_0 ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])])]) ).
thf(c_0_5,plain,
! [X1: nat,X2: nat,X3: nat] :
( ( X2 = X3 )
| ( ( pl @ X1 @ X2 )
!= ( pl @ X1 @ X3 ) ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( x
= ( pl @ y @ esk2_0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
! [X1: nat] :
( ( X1 = esk2_0 )
| ( ( pl @ y @ X1 )
!= x ) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( x
= ( pl @ y @ esk1_0 ) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 != esk2_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
thf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]),c_0_9]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.04 % Problem : NUM648^1 : TPTP v9.3.1. Released v3.7.0.
% 0.00/0.06 % Command : run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.10/0.26 % Computer : n009.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.26 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.26 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.26 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.10/0.26 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.10/0.26 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.26 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.10/0.26 % DateTime : Tue Sep 29 12:31:15 UTC 2026
% 0.10/0.26 % CPUTime :
% 0.10/0.26 Running run_E /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p 300 THM
% 0.26/0.33 Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.26/0.34 Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover-ho --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox/tmp/tmp.3JjEuzDZoI/E---3.1_3924841.p
% 0.26/0.37 % Version: 3.5.1-ho
% 0.26/0.37 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.37 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.37 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.37 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.37 % Starting sh4l with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.37 % Starting ehoh_best_nonlift_rwall with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.37 % ho_unfolding_6 with pid 3924855 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Result found by ho_unfolding_6
% 0.26/0.37 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.37 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.37 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.37 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.37 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.26/0.37 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.26/0.37 % Search class: HHUPF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.37 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.26/0.37 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.37 % SubtermCWHack with pid 3924858 completed with status 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Result found by SubtermCWHack
% 0.26/0.37 % Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNFFN.
% 0.26/0.37 % Scheduled 4 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.26/0.37 % Starting new_ho_10 with 1500s (5) cores
% 0.26/0.37 % Starting ho_unfolding_6 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.37 % (lift_lambdas = 0, lambda_to_forall = 0,unroll_only_formulas = 1, sine = Auto)
% 0.26/0.37 % No SInE strategy applied
% 0.26/0.37 % Search class: HHUPF-FFSF22-SFFFFFNN
% 0.26/0.37 % Scheduled 7 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.26/0.37 % Starting SubtermCWHack with 28s (1) cores
% 0.26/0.37 % Preprocessing time : 0.001 s
% 0.26/0.37
% 0.26/0.37 % Proof found!
% 0.26/0.37 % SZS status Theorem
% 0.26/0.37 % SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.26/0.37 % Parsed axioms : 6
% 0.26/0.37 % Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Initial clauses : 8
% 0.26/0.37 % Removed in clause preprocessing : 4
% 0.26/0.37 % Initial clauses in saturation : 4
% 0.26/0.37 % Processed clauses : 5
% 0.26/0.37 % ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % ...subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % ...remaining for further processing : 5
% 0.26/0.37 % Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Generated clauses : 6
% 0.26/0.37 % ...of the previous two non-redundant : 4
% 0.26/0.37 % ...aggressively subsumed : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Paramodulations : 5
% 0.26/0.37 % Factorizations : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % NegExts : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.26/0.37 % Disequality decompositions : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Total rewrite steps : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % ...of those cached : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Propositional unsat checks : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Propositional check models : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Propositional clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Propositional unsat core size : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Propositional preprocessing time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.37 % Propositional encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.37 % Propositional solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.37 % Success case prop preproc time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.37 % Success case prop encoding time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.37 % Success case prop solver time : 0.000
% 0.26/0.37 % Current number of processed clauses : 5
% 0.26/0.37 % Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.26/0.37 % Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.26/0.37 % Non-unit-clauses : 2
% 0.26/0.37 % Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% 0.26/0.37 % ...number of literals in the above : 6
% 0.26/0.37 % Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Condensation successes : 0
% 0.26/0.37 % Termbank termtop insertions : 294
% 0.26/0.37 % Search garbage collected termcells : 69
% 0.26/0.37
% 0.26/0.37 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.37 % User time : 0.000 s
% 0.26/0.37 % System time : 0.004 s
% 0.26/0.37 % Total time : 0.004 s
% 0.26/0.37 % Maximum resident set size: 3628 pages
% 0.26/0.37
% 0.26/0.37 % -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/0.37 % User time : 0.002 s
% 0.26/0.37 % System time : 0.008 s
% 0.26/0.37 % Total time : 0.010 s
% 0.26/0.37 % Maximum resident set size: 4864 pages
% 0.26/0.37 % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------